shirgall

Almost. The officer draws the firearm to stop a felony in progress or curtail or prevent violence in a escalating chain of events. It is used as a threat (and for officer safety) but not necessarily discharged. The regular person on the street has the same justification for drawing their firearm and pointing it at other people... to stop a violent felony, usually one being inflicted upon them. What's different is that the officer has the duty to apprehend violent criminals and may use lethal force to do so.

Forknight, thank you for speaking up and standing up for those children. I have not been brave enough to do this myself.

Our mental processing of visual information can handle filtering out sync issues if it's <100ms. At 60fps this is on the order of a difference of 6 or 7 frames you can be off and people won't notice. I pointed it out because the previous video was not out of sync so something slipped into the process in that short amount of time. A clapperboard can get your sync down to the same frame, so we can have tolerance of a little variation in the processing that gets done to videos down the line where we have no control.

These politicians never say something in public without gauging what the reaction to it will be and what their reaction to the reaction will be. The trick is to predict the chain of events before getting swept up into them. If this is an opening salvo to a negotiation then the tactic is likely to be framing the debate to be in a particular "window" of discussion. Sure, some people are reacting by saying "you're an idiot go away" but the other side of the aisle will likely say, "what if we just ensure there's a mechanism to comply with legal searches by those who sell messaging services commercially?" That is where the battle will be fought. Watch for it. These guys learned from SOPA (and a million other things) about how to be sneaky about revealing the underlying concession they really wanted all along.

One wonders. The point of using "point of view" pronouns is to emphasize abstraction. If it feels natural to use second person pronouns because you want to feel like you are addressing someone else, even if that someone lives inside your head, so be it. Just recognize it for what it is, a way of insulating or distancing yourself from what is being said. I have, in the past, pointed out the use of passive voice to avoid the appearance of direct action (and, therefore, culpability). It has similar utility.

Ok, you may be allowed to build a "man cave" in the garage... and you may post tin signs with old advertising and sexy ladies and have a leather couch.

It was a significant event, albeit impotent. The loudest defiance to terrorism is calling out its supporters, mounting swift defense against its excesses, and refusing to consider its demands. There have been massive demonstrations against terrorism for decades in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and the rest. We've ignored them because they don't fit our media's narrative. I appreciate the march and it's intention, but I am not fond of the message. While those who started the "We Are Charlie" idea had their hearts in the right place, the statists, media, and powers-that-be got behind it rather than other statements because they know we will feel like targets and be afraid because Charlie Hepbo were the victims (with the added bonus of people whispering it was Charlie Hepbo's fault on top). Why should we identify with targets that they feel justified in attacking? The difference is that Charlie is us not that we are Charlie. What if the slogan was "Nous refusons d'être la victime de Toute personne"? (We refuse to be anyone's victim.) Hard for the cult of the omnipotent state to get behind that.

However, we know that the most effective and resilient child is not the brutalized one. The most effective and resilient adult only has to slay demons outside of him or herself, and isn't held back by the additional ones inside. The most effective and resilient society engulfs traumatized children like white blood cells to empathetically support them when they need it most, instead of eating our young like an autoimmune disorder. It shouldn't be revolutionary. Prominent child experts have risen for generations giving loud and strident advice on peaceful parenting.

Indeed, went on a big cruise around the Caribbean, at 4 Ryan remembered the beach. This is a later shot... My recipe for success for vacations (especially travelling ones) is give them choices, let them pick something and live up to the choice, give a little time to explore, and don't cram the day full.

With the recent Golden Globes showering praise on Boyhood, but not having seen it yet... is it worth a look? I see some inappropriate parenting in the trailer, but little context to see any result, or correction, of it.

While we're at it, why is it that most science fiction has to have some military or quasi-military organization (and therefore war and lasers) in it, even if it's just to be the bad guy? Why is it that most romantic comedies tropes turn into exaggerated responses to simple miscommunications? Ever get the sense that people want the apocalypse (esp. the zombie one) because such worlds are easier to understand, especially motivations? All of these seem like it's easier to make an interesting story this way, and that such spectacles draw people to a show when they channel-surf.

One of the best pieces of advice I received was to not check my email more than a couple times a day, and even then only on a schedule. I definitely felt anxiety closing the window.

Compared to the previous video "How Much Can You Change", Stef's lips are out of sync with the audio. Consider the use of a clapperboard to help with this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clapperboard

Yeah, there are missed letters all through this. The leading '(' should be an 'h', there shouldn't be any spaces. there's no '►' in a proper url, etc. etc.

What I have seen is the claim that women are "more nurturing than males" but that's a comparison to a poor substitute and not a paragon. "More nurturing than a cat" is similar, as recent studies indicate that cats won't even wait until your body is cold before eating your face if they're hungry.

Yeah, while I enjoy a good fisking-style video the critic makes so many non-arguments in the first few seconds I had to stop watching.

The point of DeFOO is to separate yourself from people that continually cause you emotional pain. It sounds like your parents still say and do things that harm you, but you did not describe anything your brother did to harm you and that, in fact, he seems to be suffering from something that you could help with. If you think you can keep your brother in your life without frequent reopenings of old wounds, it's probably worth trying to save him. His avoidance of painful topics, however, makes it sound like a challenge to push for therapy and peaceful parenting as his cure.

Yeah, in general I save that for someone I've had many conversations with before and can trust to switch on the "formal argument" light mutually.

We can benefit plenty if philosophical or scientific arguments are made without relying on religion. Do we toss out Galileo's telescope because he was a Christian? Let's judge statements on the merits, and not the unsaid.

At first blush, we should always judge arguments on their merits and not the personalities and beliefs of those that are making them. If they were making faith claims in philosophy that's not going to work. Just because they believe in the the Sky Ghosts doesn't make "all men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore Socrates is mortal" wrong. This is totally different than the million monkeys writing Shakespeare, because there are plenty of otherwise religious philosophers and scientists that have something interesting to tell us.

Who benefits when you berate someone that's willing to listen and share their experiences?

This is very abbreviated from the recommended training. It's more likely the guy that went behind the truck put down his phone and drew his gun from concealment, not from the bumper.

I still get excited about The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones, because they are considerably less brutal and simplistic than the evening news.

Police critic does a little scenario training.

Have you asked them what they'd like to do? What sort of history are they interested in? I did a lot of travel with my kids (I had the kind of job where we'd have a big international trip every year), and admittedly they had no idea until they got places what they'd be like. They were a little older than yours for most of our travel.